BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1173|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
VETO
Bill No: SB 1173
Author: Wolk (D)
Amended: 8/2/10
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 5-3, 3/23/10
AYES: Pavley, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Padilla, Wolk
NOES: Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff
NO VOTE RECORDED: Simitian
SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE : 4-2, 4/19/10
AYES: Simitian, Corbett, Lowenthal, Pavley
NOES: Runner, Strickland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hancock
ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 12-5, 8/12/10
AYES: Fuentes, Bradford, Huffman, Coto, Davis, De Leon,
Gatto, Hall, Skinner, Solorio, Torlakson, Torrico
NOES: Conway, Harkey, Miller, Nielsen, Norby
SENATE FLOOR : 22-11, 5/27/10
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Cedillo, Corbett, DeSaulnier,
Ducheny, Florez, Hancock, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal,
Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Romero, Simitian,
Steinberg, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Cogdill, Correa, Denham, Dutton,
Hollingsworth, Huff, Runner, Strickland, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Aanestad, Cox, Harman, Oropeza, Wiggins,
Vacancy, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 50-28, 8/19/10 - See last page for vote
CONTINUED
SB 1173
Page
2
SENATE FLOOR : 22-11, 8/25/10
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Cedillo, Corbett, DeSaulnier,
Ducheny, Florez, Hancock, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal,
Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Romero, Simitian,
Steinberg, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Blakeslee, Cogdill, Correa, Denham, Dutton,
Emmerson, Huff, Strickland, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Aanestad, Harman, Hollingsworth, Oropeza,
Runner, Wiggins, Vacancy
SUBJECT : Recycled water
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill prohibits, conditionally, the use of
raw water for nonpotable use if recycled water is
available.
Assembly Amendments excluded rainwater from the definition
of raw water, and clarified that availability of water
includes a reliability standard as well.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1. Declares that the use of potable domestic water for
nonpotable uses is a waste or an unreasonable use of
water if recycled water is available, as determined by
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and
other requirements are met.
2. Prohibits a person or public agency from using any water
that is suitable for potable domestic use for nonpotable
uses if suitable recycled water is available, as
determined by the board, and other requirements are met.
3. Declares that the use of potable domestic water for the
irrigation of residential landscaping, floor trap
priming, cooling towers, and air-conditioning devices is
a waste and unreasonable use of water if recycled water
is available, as determined by the board, and other
requirements are met.
SB 1173
Page
3
This bill:
1.Defines "raw water" as untreated surface water or
groundwater but excludes remediated groundwater or
rainwater.
2.Expands, to include the use of raw water for nonpotable
use, the existing declaration that the use of potable
domestic water for nonpotable use is a waste or
unreasonable use if recycled water is available.
3.Adds reliability to the criteria by which SWRCB
determines the availability of recycled water.
Background
Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution
requires the prevention of waste or unreasonable use of
water. It further provides that the right to water does
not extend to water that is wasted or unreasonably used.
Under current law, the use of potable domestic water for
non-potable purposes is a waste or unreasonable use within
the meaning of Article X, Section 2, if recycled water is
available that meets specific conditions. Those conditions
include that the recycled water is of adequate quality, is
furnished at a reasonable cost, that it meets public health
requirements, will not adversely affect downstream water
rights, and will not degrade the environment.
Consequently, if recycled water is available that meets the
conditions established in statute and a water user instead
uses potable water, the water rights associated with the
potable water are at risk for violating Article X, Section
2.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SWRCB estimates that under this bill an additional waste
and unreasonable use hearing will occur once every two to
three years. A typical hearing costs about $65,000 to
complete.
SB 1173
Page
4
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/19/10)
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
California Landscape Contractors Association
California Water Association
City of Camarillo
Contra Costa Water District
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Los Angeles County
Upper San Gabriel Valley Water District
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/19/10)
City of San Diego
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"Recycled water has been identified as one of the most
promising potential sources of new water supplies to meet
the growing water needs of California. Use of recycled
water is particularly beneficial because its use frees up
water for treatment and use as drinking water or it
provides an alternative to increasing diversions from
sensitive ecosystems such as the Delta and over-drafted
groundwater basins.
"State law currently encourages the use of recycled water
for industrial, landscape and other non-potable uses, in
place of the use of potable water supplies. In some cases,
however, raw water, rather than potable water is used for
industrial cooling and other non-potable uses.
Unfortunately, while the use of recycled water would
provide similar benefits if used to replace the demand of
these non-potable uses, current law does not cover the
replacement of raw water with recycled water.
"This bill simply extends current law to encourage the use
of recycled water in place of raw water in addition to
potable water. With this extension, we can ensure that
recycled water use is maximized and that raw water can be
re-directed for treatment and use for potable needs or left
in the river or aquifer for environmental or storage
purposes."
SB 1173
Page
5
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The City of San Diego states,
"The City of San Diego (San Diego) opposes your
legislation, SB 1173, which would prohibit a person or
public agency from using raw or potable water that is
suitable for nonpotable municipal or industrial uses if
suitable recycled water is available, as determined by the
board, and other requirements are met.
"Inasmuch as San Diego agrees with the goal of encouraging
recycled water, we feel that this bill does not accomplish
that goal. Fundamentally, we disagree with any policy that
diminishes local decision-making. We envision several
scenarios in which this bill's tenets could harm San
Diego's recycled water program. As such, we are
registering our opposition to the bill."
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
"I am returning Senate Bill 1173 without my signature.
This bill would define "raw" water, and would require
that recycled water be used for non-potable municipal
or industrial purposes in lieu of raw or potable
water, if recycled water is available that meets
certain conditions, as determined by the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
I strongly support the use of recycled water to
improve the efficient use of the State's limited water
resources, and I encourage businesses and local
governments to move to recycled water for their
operations as quickly as feasible.
It was for this reason that I signed SB 918 (Pavley),
which provides funding for the Department of Public
Health to finish the recycled water regulations they
have been working on for the last 15 years. Until
those regulations are finished, I think it would not
be feasible for California businesses and local
governments to be able to comply with the provisions
of this bill.
In addition, there will certainly be substantial costs
SB 1173
Page
6
associated with a significant movement to the use of
recycled water. It was for this very reason that the
"Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act
of 2012" includes $1.25 billion for water recycling
and water use efficiency measures like this. As
such, this bill is premature until such funds are
available.
For these reasons, I am unable to sign this bill."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles
Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De
Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani,
Galgiani, Gatto, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber,
Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza,
Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin,
Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson,
Torres, Torrico, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill,
Blakeslee, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Fletcher, Fuller,
Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Jeffries,
Knight, Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby,
Silva, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Vacancy
CTW:nl 10/5/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****